Dazed and confused: Misunderstanding the pro-life message

There are many things that can lead to confusion. Possible causes include misunderstood directions, a label that wasn’t read, or a handful of off-white pills that you got at a Korean pharmacy. I’m about to address all three examples.

I spent two memorable years living in Suwon, South Korea (where all good stories have their beginning). While I gained an appreciation for bulgoggi (seasoned beef), I never did pick up much of the language. Similarly, many of Suwon’s older residents have yet to catch on to the Queen’s English. This wasn’t usually a problem, however, since, like a lot of Wei-guk-in, I found that I could get by with hand gestures and non-threatening smiles. The shortcomings of this approach became all too apparent one day when I tried to apply it to the Korean medical system.

That was the wrong time to smile and nod.

My employers had a curious attitude when it came to illness. Taking the day off from work was frowned upon, but I was encouraged to go to the hospital for any and all ailments. And so it was that I found myself in a doctor’s office attempting to explain my flu-like symptoms via pantomime. The physician was clearly putting a solid effort into trying to understand me, but judging by his frown and repeated head-shakes, I could tell that my improv skills just weren’t getting the job done. Thankfully, we weren’t alone in this endeavor, as three nurses had been summoned to help translate.

After some back-and-forth, it appeared that a diagnosis had been reached and I was to get a prescription. The nurses each repeated the number “four” and motioned as if they were swallowing pills, which I took to mean that I should ingest four of whatever it was that they were giving me. The pharmacist seemed to confirm these instructions, so I promptly went home and popped four unknown pills before walking out to the grocery store.

Later, I discovered that “four” actually referred to the number of days that my prescription was to last. I also found out what the pills contained: codeine. Lots of codeine.

I began to suspect that something was amiss when my feet started getting lighter. This was followed by an oddly euphoric sensation. I’m also pretty sure that I was developing the glassy-eyed look of someone who’s had one too many bottles of soju. Inside, however, I was beginning to fear that I had overdosed on the wrong prescription and was now about to drop dead on a random street corner in East Asia. The fact that I had yet to acquire a phone and thus had no means of calling for help wasn’t exactly comforting, either. These feelings all congealed into sort of a slow-motion panic. It was a feeling of terror, but I was feeling it through a warm, dopey haze.

The point of this story isn’t to glamorize drug use, for indeed, there is nothing glamorous about a stoned, panicky white person stumbling down a Korean sidewalk. Rather, it is to illustrate how getting the facts wrong can lead to a confused outcome. That principle isn’t limited to prescription drugs; it applies to the the abortion debate, too.

As anyone who has been involved with the pro-life movement knows, we tend to attract hateful comments. Some are old standbys, such as “Your mom should have aborted you.” These words are invariably sneered out with a look of smug satisfaction, as if the speaker is somehow convinced that he or she is the first one clever enough to think of them. There is something almost adorable about this level of naïve cluelessness. It’s like listening to a small child who seems to think that learning to use the toilet without assistance has transformed him into a veritable god among men.

Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!

Other times it’s not entirely clear if a negative comment is really motivated by blind hatred or if the speaker is just confused. For example, consider this:

Now, it’s certainly possible that Jose knows that this isn’t true and simply wants to slander us. I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt, however, and consider that he might just be confused about the facts. And the fact is that while I’ve spent a good deal of time in the pro-life movement, I have never seen as much contempt for “sluts,” “whores,” or (most creatively) “slutty whores” as I’ve observed among the “bro-choice” crowd.

The premise behind bro-choice is simple: being able to talk a woman into having an abortion means not having to support your child, which reduces the risks associated with “getting laid.” Nils Parker summed up this attitude when he said, “Any procedure that can erase a massive lapse in judgment while at the same time saving hundreds of thousands of dollars and no fewer than 18 years of responsibility for the welfare of another human being, and can be performed with what amounts to a Black & Decker wet/dry vac from your local Home Depot – that’s a procedure from which I can derive countless hours of entertainment.”

While abortion may help provide entertainment for Nils, it also tends to offer a gruesome death for the one being aborted. When done in the first trimester, it usually involves vacuum aspiration (i.e., getting sucked out of one’s mother through a tube). This isn’t an option for disposing of a more developed child, though. That’s why a later-term abortion typically calls for a dilation & evacuation, which consists of taking a set of forceps and pulling the child apart one chunk at a time.

OK, this isn’t directly tied to the paragraph – I just thought it was cool.

Given the indifference that a lot of male abortion proponents show towards the lives of their children, it stands to reason that they would treat their female targets with a similar measure of depravity. On this matter, they are at least consistent.

Writer Christian McQueen blessed society with his “10 Slut Commandments,” which serves as a how-to guide on using and denigrating women. After reviewing the various methods of exploiting a woman’s insecurity and emotional pain for your own advantage, he then explains how it’s important to take “a slut” in for an abortion should she have the gall to get pregnant on you. The website that Christian writes for, Return of Kings, features another fellow by the name of Emmanuel Goldstein. He generously offers advice on “5 Ways To Bully Fat Sluts On A Date” and instructs men to “Act As If Every Girl Is A Slut” (or a “whore,” “bitch,” or “skank”). When it comes to dispensing misogynistic wisdom, these men truly know how to give.

Tucker Max is an abortion fan who knows something about contempt. He once pointed out that, “[d]ue to the potent combination of my sexual recklessness and the slutty nature of some of the girls I have slept with, I have accumulated enough stories and anecdotes about abortion that they could name a Planned Parenthood clinic after me.” Also, he apparently hasn’t gotten the memo explaining that abortion is a “painful personal decision” that “no one takes lightly”:

Safe, legal, and…well, it’s legal, anyway.

I admit that the logic behind calling a woman names because she’s been kind enough to have sex is somewhat mysterious to me. What’s not mysterious is the logic that another contemptible group applies to abortion. Child abusers understand that it’s an option they can use to remove evidence of their crimes – and use it they do.

John Blanks, Jr. brought his daughter to Planned Parenthood for an abortion after getting her pregnant. Adam Gault made use of their “reproductive health services” as well – Planned Parenthood turned his teenage victim back over to him when they were done vacuuming out his child. Other victims have taken legal action against the abortion provider when Planned Parenthood similarly aided their abusers. Finally, seven former Planned Parenthood employees (including ex-clinic director Abby Johnson) wrote an open letter to Congress that outlined how the abortion giant fails to protect victims of abuse and sexual trafficking.

How do pro-lifers show contempt for women? The answer is “not very well.” A lot of our efforts revolve around providing food, diapers, and parenting skills to new moms in need. We also try to help those who are seeking to provide an adoptive home to a baby who could use one. As for what we’ve been legislating recently, much of it has involved stopping abortions after 20 weeks of gestation. While we’re in favor of protecting all children, keeping them from getting torn up after they can feel pain has been a special priority.

If Jose wants to see what denigration looks like, he’s going have a hard time finding it at Live Action. He would be better off listening to what some of his fellow abortion supporters have to say. That might clear up his confusion.

Live Action News relies completely on the generosity of our donors to keep us going. Please donate today!

Ingrid Heimark

Excellent article! It is true, noone does more to selflessly help women that pro-lifers. And this rape/incest-thing about abortion being legal, sometimes one have to wonder whether that is simply a sale-trick, as they make more money on aborting children after incest so the a hole can go get his victim pregnant again and ready for a second abortion.

And even legislation meant to help a woman should she encounter a sleazy abortionist is seen as anti-woman, when weask that abortionists having the same hospital privileges as a dentist. Pro-choice is not pro-woman, it is all about abortion, without restriction and without apology,they at least got that one right

Adam Peters

“Pro-choice is not pro-woman, it is all about abortion, without restriction and without apology…”
Great summary–thanks Ingrid :)

DianaG2

Well, the little guy or gal wouldn’t hear that apology anyway.

Because she or he is dead.

Ingrid Heimark

I don’t understand how someone can vote down this statement, is an objective description of the truth

DianaG2

So true, Ingrid.

Thanks.

belgianchic

SO that whole ‘women use abortion as birth control thing’….She was perfectly clear in that she was not going to do that, like every other woman in the world

Adam Peters

The point is that those men who neither value nor respect women are willing to use it for that purpose. According to some studies, as many as half of the women who get abortions feel that they were pressured into them, with some facing violence when they refuse.

Most pro-lifers get shot down as soon as they mention that a man might have any other opinion than supporting abortion. As soon as pro-lifers mention men opposing abortion or having the attitude of supporting for and caring for their children, they are met with comments like, “A man doesn’t have a uterus, so they can’t have an opinion about abortion,” or “So you’re in favor of making women into servants,” etc.

And, like Adam said, we are concerned about changing the attitudes of men about women and abortion. It’s hard to tell that from an internet discussion though, unless you ask.

susmart3

As someone who personally knows three men who ended up raising the kids because ‘Mom’ walked out… I would not be one to say that… And yes, the internet is not my preferred method of discourse.

Rebekah

Thank you. I am glad that you’ve encountered real men who are willing to take responsibility for their children. One of the reasons I am personally against abortion is that I have seen that it encourages the mindset that allows men to have sex and walk away, without thinking of the consequences or taking responsibility for their actions.

DianaG2

But, it appears that “equality” for women means doing all the awful things that guys have done without consequence.

Rebekah

True. My view of equality is that both the woman and the man take equal responsibility for their actions. Just as the woman became a mother when she got pregnant, the man became a father.

In addition to what Rebekah said, when men themselves speak out against abortion, they get shot down quite often, especially if they’re doing it, in part or in full, due to their religious convictions. For example, the slogan, “If the pope were a women, Catholics would be pro-choice,” is quite common. Men are sidelined by female pro-choicers quite often because they’re not the ones pregnant, so even if they want to raise the child, they wind up with little to no say in the matter. In many circles of discussion on the issue, that is a central point: men are as responsible as women are for the child.

Another issue which doesn’t get addressed as frequently as it should be, specifically about men, is the instance you mentioned below, of women walking out on men and leaving them with the child. See, another part of the issue is that women in the workforce at least get some form of recognition for the need to be there for their children, and so they do get at least some maternal leave and such. Fathers, however, don’t, and it’s generally expected that fathers be the bread-winners of the family. Hence men paying alimony and so on. Women who walk out on their children and partner, IMO, should still have to help financially at least, so that way the father can spend more time with his child/children and make sure that they’re receiving proper care and attention.

Also, although I know it’s anecdotal, and not particularly convincing or anything, but most of the guys I’ve met and discussed abortion with are staunchly pro-life. Of the women I’ve discussed abortion with, this is not the case. Many are divided on the issue, or go to one side or the other. I think in part this is simply because for women, it hits somewhat closer to home than it does for men, since the child is growing inside their body, not inside their partner’s body, so more of the burden in the beginning falls on the mother. This seems to also be a driving point as far as the anger directed at pro-life men is concerned. However, it’s unfair to everyone to lay all the responsibility to one person, or take all the responsibility from another.

Guest

They do and try to reach out to men and try if allowed educate on what abortion is and what is does to women. It is well documented. When many of us pro-kiferstry to get down to the heart of the issue and truly discuss this in all aspects with men and women, some who are for abortion get mad, defensive and even violent. That is well documented. Perhaps being tolerant is a two way street and hearing out your adversary instead of shutting them out would behoove many and we would all get farther. Yet that is a choice, to listen and whether you agree or not. That requires a attitude adjustment on their part and it is basic manners yet many have not been taught those these last 20 yrs and we see the results. We can suggest and try to discuss yet that adjustment is on the person to take on.

Guest

They do and try to reach out to men and try if allowed educate on what
abortion is and what is does to women. It is well documented. When many
of us pro-lifers try to get down to the heart of the issue and truly
discuss this in all aspects with men and women, peacefully, some who are for
abortion get mad, defensive and even violent. That is well documented.
Perhaps being tolerant is a two way street and hearing out your
adversary instead of shutting them out would behoove many and we would
all get farther. Yet that is a choice, to listen and whether you agree
or not. That requires a attitude adjustment on their part and it is
basic manners yet many have not been taught those these last 20 yrs and
we see the results. We can suggest and try to discuss yet that
adjustment is on the person to take on.

Guest

They do and try to reach out to men and try if allowed educate on what
abortion is and what is does to women. It is well documented.

MarcusFenix

I can give you a different perspective on that, from the male side of things.

Often, in my discussions (polite, hostile, and everything between), I’m told by pro-choice supporters that because I support most pro-life policies, that I must hate women. That I’m a misogynist. That my opinion doesn’t matter or count because of my gender. That is how the other side of the debate works towards me.

On the other hand, I cannot recall a single time that a pro-life person told me that my gender somehow tainted or skewed my opinion. Not once have I ever been called a misogynist by pro-life supporters, and with good reason…it’s just not the truth.

In general, it’s never been an issue about addressing genders specifically, and thus isn’t really part of the issue. Of the pro-life groups I associate with, such as here on LAN or elsewhere in the real world, my gender isn’t important. The fact that men are/should be responsible for their offspring is a common and often heard line in discourse from a large percentage of the public. But in pro life discussions, my gender isn’t the question. My attitude, as a person…not as a man…is what’s looked at and accounted for at the end of the day. The pro-life groups I associate with (and likely could have anyone here echo this very sentiment) work to change attitudes across the board. The gender involved is merely a statistic.

Hope that helps.

DianaG2

You can’t be that unaware.

One of the main doctrines of the pro-abort movement has always been, “If you have a [certain body part], you should stay out of the conversation. You have nothing to say.”

Apparently that only applies to pro-life men, though, because this insane “bro-choice” nonsense seems to be popular. (I hope I’m wrong about that, though?)

I don’t know what they say about pro-life WOMEN??

Just anything they can think of, I guess.

belgianchic

well, of course, some men don’t value or respect women. that is obvious. and yes, men who push abortion on women don’t value or respect them, and nobody should ever be pressured into an abortion. that is disgusting.

DianaG2

Only half? I’ve read 60 to 80 percent.

PrincessJasmine4

so now pro aborts speak for every woman in the world?
No… there are certainly plenty of women who benefit from an abortion frequent customer punch card.

I just found it interesting that, given the common phrase of ‘women use abortion as birth control’ among pro lifers, you would choose to have this woman specify that she was NOT going to use abortion as birth control.

PrincessJasmine4

Ok
Fair enough point.

Adam Peters

The focus of this article was on how if you really want to see “contempt for sluts” (or women in general), you’ll have a much easier time finding it among certain male abortion supporters than you will at Live Action or among the mainstream pro-life movement. And some of the evidence for this is that they’ll push for a woman to use abortion as birth control whether she wants to or not.

belgianchic

well, sure, some male abortion rights supporters have contempt for women. However, the contempt for women I’ve seen here at Live Action is sickening. Denying their humanity in forcing them to bear children against their wil, so that we are nothing more than animals? Nobody should ever push abortion on a woman, it’s her decision to make, no one else’s.

Adam Peters

“Denying their humanity in forcing them to bear children against their will, so that we are nothing more than animals?”
It’s interesting that you bring up animals–under our animal cruelty laws, you couldn’t put down a stray dog via the methods that we use to dispose of an unwanted child.

belgianchic

oh for chrissake a fetus is not a child.

PrincessJasmine4

Oh for chirssake, yes, he or she is a child even as a fetus.
Stop dehumanizing us at our stage of development.
Even abortionists refer to their victims as children and babies.
Why can’t you just own up to it?
What is it that you know that they don’t?

belgianchic

hahaha ‘abortionists’, ‘victims’….you could write a crime drama

PrincessJasmine4

You must dehumanize the child in order to not look at them as victims
serial rapists and murderers do that to their victims

This is not fiction. It’s what I’ve read from testimonies of aboritontistt and clinic workers.

DianaG2

serial rapists, murderers . . .

members of the SS . . .

owners of slaves . . .

You name it. Wherever there is violent degradation, there will always be scapegoating first.

“They’re not really human anyway.”

“They don’t really feel the cold like we do.”

“They” versus “We.”

Those are clues. But, who are “THEY”? And, who are “WE”?

Answer: A group of human beings with 23 pairs of chromosomes.

Answer: Another group of human beings with 23 pairs of chromosomes.

Adam Peters

Well, he or she has human DNA, a detectable heart beat at 6 weeks, unique fingerprints at 17 weeks, and the ability to feel pain at 20 weeks. What other traits does he or she need for you to consider him or her to be a child? Also, who’s Chris and what does he have to do with this?

belgianchic

need to be outside of a woman’s body.

Adam Peters

Why is that?

PrincessJasmine4

As sick as this?

“The first time, I felt like a murderer, but I did it again and again and again, and now, 20 years later, I am facing what happened to me as a doctor and as a human being. Sure, I got hard. Sure, the money was important. And oh, it was an easy thing, once I had taken the step, to see the women as animals and the babies as just tissue.”

– Abortionist quoted from a radio talk show by John Rice in “Abortion” Litt D. Murfreesboro, TN.

There you have it, out of the mouth of the very people who perform abortions.
He felt like a murderer. Why?
I’d be hard pressed to find anyone on LAN saying anything quite so horrible about women.

belgianchic

1 abortion doctor out of many many more who do what they do because they want to help women, and for that I thank them out of everything I have. Maybe you haven’t been looking in the right places on Live Action, because it’s gross what goes down here. Not everyone, of course. There’s still hope.

PrincessJasmine4

But it’s not just one.
There are so many many more.
They have to dehumanize the woman and the child to morally justify it to themselves.

Have you read what clinic workers have to got through?
(I’m not talking about protestors)
It turns you into a different person to witness the deaths of these babies.

belgianchic

not really, no. you have to dehumanize the woman to deny legal abortion, yes. but to provide it? no. and fetuses are not children.
i have worked in an abortion clinic, so yes, i do. no complaints. and the protestors dont’ go through anything except harass patients and hold medically inaccurate signs, so there’s that.

PrincessJasmine4

No you do not have to dehumanize the woman to tell her that abortion is killing her child and to deny one to her.
A life is being saved.
I’m sure you’ve worked in an abortion mill, it would not surprise me.
Some people are immune to the carnage, but to the vast majority, it dehumanizes them and changes them.

They are not medically inaccurate,
So there that too.

DianaG2

:-)

DianaG2

Where is the lack of medical accuracy in the protesters’ signs? What signs do they display?

PrincessJasmine4

I’m not sure it’s as gross as what pro aborts say about us when we are in utero.
The level of dehumanization these pro aborts/anti birthers have to get to to justify the taking of someone else’s life is sick.

belgianchic

what, that fetuses are fetuses and not fully grown children?

PrincessJasmine4

Who said that we are fully grown children in the womb?
That’s like saying a toddler is a fully grown adult.
Very silly thing to say

You cannot discriminate against us just because we are in a specific stage of development

Precisely why I do not believe the “one in three women get an abortion” claim! We are aware multiple repeat abortions exist, but there is no real data as to how often this is happening.

Adam Peters

“You were saying?”
Nothing accurate…. ;)

Ingrid Heimark

Someone does it, but it really doesn’t matter if she uses it for that or as a backup for contraceptive failure, she still has no right to kill the very real unborn life she carries

belgianchic

You’re right, it doesn’t make a difference how she would exercise her right to choose, or why. It doesn’t matter to me at all. And I would disagree with you and say that yes, she does have a right to terminate a pregnancy

Ingrid Heimark

And kill her fetus

belgianchic

oh dear god. Women who have abortions are not coldhearted. I’m not cold hearted. 1 in 3 women in the US are not cold hearted.

Ingrid Heimark

Not every woman who has abortion are coldhearted, most don’t know what they do, that is why you people don’t like women’s right to know laws. But you are coldhearted yes, no doubt in my mind

belgianchic

wow, so a stranger on the internet knows more about me than I do, and that my husband does, and my parents…weird. You must be brilliant. That is very patronizing to say that we dont’ know what we do. we know perfectly well, we aren’t idiots. we don’t like ‘right to know’ laws because they impede a womans’ access to an abortion.

Adam Peters

Actually, no, a lot of them don’t. Former Planned Parenthood clinic director Abby Johnson didn’t know what it was really about until she assisted with an ultrasound guided abortion and watched the baby kick and struggle as the doctor started cutting. Interestingly, this was after she had an abortion herself.

Ingrid Heimark

impede, how? By giving her the facts? You really think abortion should be excempt from the right to know as all other medical procedures are obliged to? And YOU are the one that want abortion to be just another medical procedure?

A woman has the right to know about fetal development, about other options, about the risks, but you don’t want her to know. I wonder what you are trying to hide?

DianaG2

But, they DO NOT IMPEDE ACCESS. Otherwise, courts would have declared “undue burden.”

They just make the mom see that the little guy or gal is real, and has a heartbeat, arms, legs.

Which I believe is why pro-aborts are so opposed.

Pro-aborts’ opposition to “right to know” seems to me to be very good evidence that it’s not about the “right to choose abortion,” but it’s really about choosing abortion itself, and turning deaf ears and blind eyes to another — better, smarter, wiser, kinder, more loving and less callous — choice.

MamaBear

The one in three is an estimate based on an estimate of the percent of women of childbearing age (which they assume is 15 to 45) who get abortions per year. It assumes only one abortion per woman, which we know is not right, but there honestly are no records on how many women have repeat abortions. It assumes all women from 15 to 45 are both fertile and sexually active, as well. Not exactly what I would consider very accurate data.
What we do know is that it is high! Too high to be only extreme circumstances such as rape or fetal deformity, or a last resort for the desperate impoverished woman struggling to survive! And yes, you have to be pretty cold-hearted to kill (or hire an abortionist to kill) your own offspring, even before birth.

Adam Peters

Elliot Segal held an on air abortion contest 8 years ago that was open to whoever had or paid for the most abortions. One fellow clocked in at 16, 5 of which were with the same woman, so yeah, I think those numbers are a little skewed.

“But Santorum isn’t just off-base about the number of abortions. He also makes a flawed assumption about the impact of abortions on U.S. population trends, Wind said.”

But now everyone is repeating it.

I don’t think there is much truth to the stat myself.. but I love that pro aborts are eating their words.

Ingrid Heimark

And kill her offspring in ways we wouldn’t even allow a serial-killer to be executed. Wow, you are stone-cold aren’t you, terminate a pregnancy really hides the hideous nature of abortion, slicing or poisoning your own child to death

Terminate a pregnancy is about the same as saying the water in my shower is not disappearing, going into it, abortion is the equivalent of what really was in the sewer system, just a nicer way to say it.

Adam Peters

Check out the dicta in Wilkerson v. Utah, where they said that “punishments of torture” would be obvious violations of the Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment (burning, dismemberment, etc.). Many of them sound an awful lot like how you would “terminate a pregnancy.” https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/99/130/case.html

belgianchic

actually, terminating a pregnancy is the accurate way of saying it. but there’s no reasoning with people like you.

Adam Peters

Why not just say that you’re terminating a life? That way there’s no ambiguity on why the pregnancy is coming to an end.

belgianchic

well, obviously. why the pregnancy is being terminated is nobody’s business except the woman’s.

Adam Peters

Should I be concerned if the woman decides to terminate her child’s life after birth, or is that nobody’s business as well?

Well then given that a newborn is pretty much identical to a fetus in the ninth month of gestation, shouldn’t we show similar concern for both?

Lisa Nelson

Why is birth significant?

DianaG2

According to the U.S. Supreme Court, birth means the accrual of civil rights — like the right to life.

That’s really about the only thing the decision says in Roe.

That doesn’t really coincide with reality, morally, biologically, socially or any other way.

PrincessJasmine4

Really?
So if a woman decides to kill her child in utero bc she’s having a girl… you’d be ok with that?
That’s just Sick

Ingrid Heimark

Actually, I don’t think sex-selection is a less good reason to kill a child than economic sircumstances, both are reprehensible. We must stop classifying abortion reasons in bad and less bad, all are horrible and gruesome

PrincessJasmine4

you’re right

belgianchic

of course not.

PrincessJasmine4

But you said it’s nobody’s business except the woman’s
so you must be ok with it.

Basset_Hound

So if Ethan Couch wanted to get ripped out of his mind and then plow into four people, killing them, I guess we should understand that it’s not our business. After all, it WAS his body (and his F-350).

PrincessJasmine4

Of course it was his parents fault
They spoiled him with a rich lifestyle
Why aren’t they on trial now?

Basset_Hound

Did you hear that instead of going to jail, he’ll be sent to a $450,000/year rehab facility in Newport Beach, CA. Mommy and Daddy will have to pay for it. Cry me a river!

As for the parents being on trial….oh yeah…they will be….

I’m sure many people in the DFW area (and probably the rest of the country) are praying to God that the civil courts will do what this sorry excuse for a judge refused to.and will take the little punk’s parents to the poorhouse.

Ah….yes…”Affluenza”, I think the court psychologist called it. Mommy and Daddy never set any limits for him. They told him he was sooooooo special, So the kids supposedly have no impulse control, and think “rules” are beneath them. In some ways, it sounds like the pro-abort trolls that clog comment threads like this one.

Ah yes…a grieving mom who lost her only daughter, a grieving dad who lost both his wife and his daughter, a preacher’s widow and the families of two kids who spent time in the ICU. Trial lawyers are licking their chops…

Ingrid Heimark

Still it is terminating a life

Ingrid Heimark

Every pregnancy is terminated, the question is, do you let the baby live, or do you go out of your way to kill hiom

belgianchic

birth is not termination.

Adam Peters

Birth brings the pregnancy to its terminus (end), does it not?

Ingrid Heimark

So a pregnancy is not terminated by birth?

DianaG2

You mean, people who disagree with you?

Andrew J. Corrales

So you support murdering the unborn future of the world, doesn’t matter how or why they’re being murdered?

If you think abortion is socially acceptable, why don’t you call it what it is? Words/phrases like “terminating/aborting the pregnancy/fetus” distance the “pro-choice advocate” from reality. “Terminate” or “abort” translates to “kill” and “pregnancy” or “fetus” translates to “child that hasn’t been born yet.” “Pro-choice” translates to “pro-abortion.” If someone is arguing for abortion, why not be honest about what it is?

PrincessJasmine4

Spot on!

Even abortionists can admit it.

Take British abortionist Judith Arcana for instance:

It is morally and ethically wrong to do abortions without acknowledging what it means to do them. I performed abortions, I have had an abortion and I am in favor of women having abortions when we choose to do so. But we should never disregard the fact that being pregnant means there is a baby growing inside of a woman, a baby whose life is ended. We ought not to pretend this is not happening.

Of course this speaks to the evil of abortion and most of it’s supporters but at least we’d have more respect for them if they just own up to what it really is :-)

Basset_Hound

Dr. Arcana is clearly using a long face for a moral disinfectant.

belgianchic

Well, I don’t believe anybody is being murdered, so there’s that.
Abortion SHOULD be socially acceptable, that’s what I work towards, to destigmatize the most common medical procedure in the world. Actually, a fetus is not a child at all, so that woudl be inaccurate of me to say. Pro-choice in no way translates to pro-abortion, although I don’t have a problem with abortion whatsoever. Pro choice means it is a choice to be made by the woman, not the government. That’s it. Plenty of my pro choice friends do not like abortion.

PrincessJasmine4

No, abortion should not and will never be acceptable, in the same way pedophilia will and never should be acceptable.

Even liberal Europe has voted again against saying that abortion is a human right.

Of course pro choice translates to pro abortion
If you’re in favor of abortion as a choice to be made, then you are pro abortion.
Pro choice does not, however, automatically equal anti-birth. That’s different. Albeit there is a scary amount of those out there too.
The only real role of the government is to protect those of us who cannot protect themselves. EI: unborn babies.

It’s interesting that you don’t think it’s murder when the very people who actually perform abortions think it’s murder.

What is it that you know that abortionists themselves don’t know?

Just own up to it.

She did:

British abortionist Judith Arcana

It is morally and ethically wrong to do abortions without acknowledging what it means to do them. I performed abortions, I have had an abortion and I am in favor of women having abortions when we choose to do so. But we should never disregard the fact that being pregnant means there is a baby growing inside of a woman, a baby whose life is ended. We ought not to pretend this is not happening.

Why should we take your word over hers?

or his?

Dr Clark: There were 2 cases that were significant in my life, and one of them was the beginning of acceptance of 2nd trimester abortions, which were accomplished by putting a needle into the uterus, draining off some fluid, to make sure that you were in the uterus, not the bladder or somewhere else with your needle, and injecting into the uterus a very strong salt solution, which would cause a: the baby to die, and contractions to begin, very shortly after the salt solution was in there, and the mother would then abort the baby.

Interviewer: She’d deliver a dead baby.

Doctor Clark: Deliver a dead baby. But in one case, she did not deliver a dead baby. It was a live baby that she delivered.

Interviewer: Do they not have their skin burned?

Doctor Clark: The skin was burned, it was hard to look at, and hard to realize that I killed a near-term baby. The dates that the mother had given me were wrong, and we had no real way of checking it at that time. Ultrasound and stuff has come in since then, so we can date a baby’s age fairly well, but not, not back then. And the baby was born alive and lived for an hour.

Interviewer: Was it a girl or a boy?

Doctor Clark: I don’t remember, and I didn’t want to remember.… But at that point I said, “No more 3rd or 2nd trimester abortions…”

Interviewer: Was the mother aware the baby was born alive?

Doctor Clark: Yes, she was, and it was just a bad scene all the way around. I mean what was I supposed to do, smother it? Strangle it?… It was just, what do I do, so I took the coward’s way out and did nothing, and the baby died. As it probably would have anyway

In his interview, he also describes first-trimester abortions done by suction:

… that was probably the most difficult part of the abortion procedure with the suction abortions, you had to go through what you suctioned out of the uterus and identify perfectly formed little arms and legs and little hands, skulls were usually crushed. Eyes and cute little noses – you just killed a baby. And I don’t care what you do, you can’t bring them back.

What were you saying? Not a baby? Not a child?

Abortionists wil beg to differ with you.

belgianchic

no, it’s not a baby and not a child. not every abortion doctor would disagree with me, in fact the majority would not. and you’re really very ignorant when you say that pro choice is pro abortion. it really is not. i’m not anti-abortion, but my father is, and he is pro choice. it comes down to whether or not it’s their decision to make, not yours.

PrincessJasmine4

yes, it he or she is a baby/child.
Nothing you say or do can take that fact away.

No it’s not ignorant.
You cannot be pro choice and be anti abortion.
That’s like saying: I’m personally opposed to child molestation but I’m ok with it happening to anyone else.
It just doesn’t make sense.

No one gets to make the decision of who lives or who dies.
You are ending a human life. Period.
Just own up to it.

You’ve said before that not every abortion doctor would disagree with you. Can you provide evidence for this?
Please.

DianaG2

It comes down to whether the little son or daughter lives and grows and gets to take a breath of oxygen on the earth . . .

or the mom kills her or him before those little lungs take that oxygen in.

(Ok, bad grammar and syntax there.)

Basset_Hound

“It’s not a baby cuz I say so, and I’m an EXPERT”!

R-I-I-I-G-H-T

Andrew J. Corrales

If you don’t believe anybody is being murdered, you should re-read what I said. If you think it should be destigmatized, re-read it again.

Fetuses have human DNA, different DNA from the mother, different DNA from the father, and unique DNA, are alive, and they do not contribute towards the well-being of the mother, rather, the mother contributes towards the well-being of the fetus. Furthermore, many psychologists are starting to believe that the personality starts developing before birth. Therefore, based on these verifiable facts, a fetus is a person.

If you still disagree, think about it this way: you and all the people you’ve ever cared about were fetuses once. Would you have supported and defended all of your (=you and the ppl you care about) respective mothers’ abortions of you all?

And abortion will never be destigmatized. When the pro-abortion movement began saying “Nobody is for abortion,” and calling themselves “pro-choice,” they admitted it was wrong and shameful. Pro-aborts aren’t proud enough of the abortions they support/defend to call themselves “pro-abortion,” they’re not proud, therefore they are secretly ashamed and trying to cover it up.

If you still disagree with me, I recommend getting psychiatric help.

PrincessJasmine4

I’m sorry Andrew but I have to disagree with one of your points.

You claim that the child in utero does not contribute to the well being of the mother.

Dr. Feldman says that “during asphyxia of the mother, the fetus sends oxygen to the maternal blood.”

The amounts of both nitrogen and phosphorus retained by the pregnant woman is greater than during her non-pregnant state. The same is true of iron and sulphur and perhaps of all elements of the body. It is the rule that a woman’s nutrition is improved during pregnancy and it is not uncommon for her ailments to disappear during this period. Investigators claim to have demonstrated the existence of placental antibodies in the mother’s blood. Antibodies are supposed to increase the resistance to germs and toxins.

That’s even better. Abortion means missing out on certain benefits a child in the oven has as perks. I will edit what I said.

Basset_Hound

If you want to destigmatize it (and thus trivialize it) then that translates into “pro-abortion”. You are advocating for the removal of societal barriers so that more abortions occur.

DianaG2

GREAT QUESTION!

DianaG2

She’s “terminating a pregnancy” by killing her little son or daughter.

A “pregnancy” is supposed to “terminate” by labor and delivery of that little son or daughter.

susmart3

“The premise behind bro-choice is simple: being able to talk a woman into having an abortion…” I know women who had pregnancies where fetus was dead or could not live. I know women were victims of rape and got pregnant. I know of teenage incest victims. They had abortions. And apparently “pro-life” thinks these are non-existent or… frivolous. You live in an entirely different universe than I do.

Adam Peters

“And apparently ‘pro-life’ thinks these are non-existent or… frivolous.”
Can you remind me where in my article I said that? I’m really sorry, but I must have forgotten saying those things.

susmart3

Apparently, you missed the part where I said “pro-life’ thinks…” I was referring to the entire movement. Unless you speaking for everyone who is ‘pro-life.’

PrincessJasmine4

considering that rape and incest make up maybe 2% of the reasons women get abortions, I believe, you are the one living in a alternate universe
There are several women who decide to keep their babies even after rape.

As a matter of fact, it’s not even on the list of most common reasons.

Maybe she’s not as “smart” as her screen name and logo suggest, you think?

PrincessJasmine4

I’m thinking that most pro aborts are not as smart as they think they are.

susmart3

Then again many pro life are actually only pro-fetus.

PrincessJasmine4

And most pro choicers are really anti-birthers

Rebekah

How many pro-life people do you know? Are you making an assumption based on a small sampling of the population, or on anecdotal evidence? Sweeping generalizations are logical fallacies.

Andrew J. Corrales

In susmart’s defense, he did say “many,” not “all.” Still not good, but not extremely bad.

Rebekah

True.

Andrew J. Corrales

Now let’s work with him on the fact that yeah, we’re pro-fetus, that’s what makes us pro-life. We’re also normally pro-mother and usually pro-father. :)

Rebekah

Good point. :)

Kathryn A. O’Keefe

I think that it more comes off that way because it’s one of the bigger more widely accepted anti-life practices (I use anti-life for lack of a better term that covers all actions that are in direct opposition to the ideals of the pro-life movement). If euthanasia were legal in all fifty states and forced practice in various countries (like forced abortions in China), if war was a commonly accepted practice and was treated as naturally as getting a laparoscopy, then the pro-life community, as well as many others who are not necessarily pro-life as far as abortion is concerned, would be arguing against it in the same manner that we currently argue against abortion. In fact, in the cases where euthanasia has been used/suggested in recent years (at least in the states), the pro-life crowd has vehemently opposed it.

Another reason why you hear so much from the pro-life crowd as far as abortion goes is due to it’s very nature. It denies the fact that a human fetus is human, or is even a separate entity. It rejects that it is anything other than an unwanted part of a woman’s body, which is biologically speaking, completely fallacious. The arguments that support abortion can also be applied to things other than abortion, including killing people with severe disabilities or illnesses. Furthermore, it isn’t healthy for the woman, especially if she’s a teenager or young adult, and can cause fertility issues later on, as well as a higher risk of miscarriage and fetal deformities in later pregnancies.

As far as helping out after the birth of a child, I agree that us pro-lifers should do more than what some of us have been. Unfortunately, I can’t say much about it on that count, since I don’t have the means to help out any except in doing what I’m already doing; namely debating with people about it. If I had any method of transportation, or knew anyone close-by who needed help with a child (other than my parents, that just goes with having a younger sibling), I’d do so, and I know many others who would as well.

Adam Peters

“It denies the fact that a human fetus is human, or is even a separate entity.”
Thanks for laying it out like that–well done.

MarcusFenix

Please feel free to explain that. :)

Ingrid Heimark

You know, we that only care about the baby before it is born, because we are not like the pro-choicers helping with housing, diapers, formuola and baby-sitting of course…..

MarcusFenix

I’m aware…but i really want to hear her take on it, in detail.

Correct observation, though.

Ingrid Heimark

We are definetely pro-life with regards to the fetus, as we are with regards to the embryo, the infant, the elderly and any other stage of development or live stage

Basset_Hound

Not completely correct. What if the catastrophe occurs late in the pregnancy where the baby can be saved but the woman can’t? No one would argue that the baby should be allowed to die if saving the mother is impossible.

Ingrid Heimark

True, but I really can’t see any such situation occuring, except for breast cancer, but then you know early on, and I don’t think it is ever ok to let a woman be what I would call a doomed incubator, respecting the unborn is respecting the mother also, no matter how grave her prognosis. The unborn is dependant upon the mother, not the other way around, by being willing to sacrifice the mother for the sake of the baby, I think we loose all credibility

Any woman willing to sacrifice her life for her child is a hero, but I would never dream of forcing a woman to carry to term at the cost of her own life, that includes also even if she has little hope of survival, I simply couldn’t. For me, I cannot tell a woman that she has to die earlier so that her child may live, that is a choice she has to make for herself

Basset_Hound

What if the mother is late in the pregnancy and suffers a catastrophic head injury or a cerebral hemorrhage? If the baby were still healthy, then he should be delivered immediately. It would not be pro-life to let him die if the mother could not be saved. That is what I was thinking of, rather than the cancer case. In fact, Randy Alcorn, who wrote “Pro Life Answers to Pro Choice Arguments” related a tragic situation that happened to a couple who were close friends of his. The mother, only after realizing she was pregnant was diagnosed with an aggressive uterine cancer. He pointed out that both would die if they withheld treatment in hopes to buy enough time for the child to be viable. He argued that the couple’s decision to opt for a hysterectomy (which of course brought about the death of the child) was indeed a pro-life decision.

I would have no argument if a mother has cancer that her treatment should come first. The death of the child is unintentional. But you do realize that even this is extremely rare.

Ingrid Heimark

You are talking about the case if the mother should be socalled brain-dead whilst pregnant? Then I think obviously they should try to keep the mother’s body functioning so that the baby have a chance at life.This should be done at any stage of pregnancy as far as I’m concerned. I agree with you on the case of uterine cancer. I think we do agree on these things, and what I envisioned you meant was that the mother would die, but faster if she kept the baby and should so anyway. I was obviously wrong about that. Even life-endangerment cases where the mother will live if she aborts are extremely seldom, and my imaginary case is probably not something that is ever relevant.

MamaBear

Ironically, I have a “prochoice” friend, whose daughter realized after chemo had started (I believe it was for a form of lymphoma, but I’m not sure) that she was pregnant. Doctors tried to convince her to abort. Her mother, fearing for her life, also tried. She resisted, chemo continued, radiation was delayed until after delivery, but the young mother and her toddler son are now doing great! And the grandma, she is thrilled that to have her grandson, especially since her daughter will never be able to have more children due to the cancer treatments. (A frequent unfortunate side effect of many cancer treatments is infertility in both young men and women.)
Would I say that all women in that position should do the same in regards to cancer treatment? No, because she was indeed risking her life by delaying radiation. But, I cannot understand my friend still being “prochoice” after her daughter went through a risk like that.

Ingrid Heimark

Ignorance is bliss? Happily your friend’s daughter was pro-life:)

MamaBear

At least she was pro-life when it came to her own baby. I really do not know the daughter personally, now she is grown.
I know a number of “pro-choice” people, in fact I would say the majority of the ones I know, who say they could never get an abortion themselves, but they think abortion should stay legal. A view that I just do not understand.

Ingrid Heimark

I would never kill mybaby, but if other people want to killtheir babies, that’s ok………..

Weird

Basset_Hound

Granted, this is a wonderful story, but it doesn’t always happen like this. In 1995, Lisa Landry Childress, the daughter of the beloved Dallas Cowboys coach Tom Landry, died of liver cancer. In 1991, she was pregnant when she was first diagnosed, and the doctors told her to terminate the pregnancy to continue treatment. She chose not to. Her daughter was born, and was perfectly healthy and continued to thrive well enough to be admitted as a freshman to Texas A&M University (that’s an accomplishment). Who knows if they would have followed the doctor’s advice, if Lisa would have lived longer. However, if the family would have chosen an abortion under THIS narrowly defined circumstance, I would be inclined to see this as an ethical choice, since the desired outcome is to save the life of the mother, rather than to kill the child (and thus to eliminate the consequences of a poor choice).

MamaBear

It is indeed a tough choice. I think this has to be case by case, each family deciding how much they will risk. A case of saving the life that can be saved.
The young woman I mentioned would have left behind a husband and another young child in addition to the baby had she not made it. I don’t have enough details to know exactly why she made her choice, whether she is prolife or just because she would not be able to have more children. Thankfully, so far, it’s a happy ending. But, that does not mean it would turn out the same for someone else in the same circumstances. Cancer can be very unpredictable.

DianaG2

So happy for this wonderful family.

DianaG2

Rarely an issue, I believe?

Ingrid Heimark

Yeah, I have never heard of such an situation, if you don’t count cases like breast cancerm but then the pregnancy is often discovered early and such an abortion will be early, or the cancer is discovered so late in pregnancy that premature labour can be induced and the baby saved

DianaG2

If they were —- well, you know.

susmart3

And maybe BassetHound is really not a Basset Hound. Could be.

Adam Peters

Well whatever she is, she’s awesome ;)

DianaG2

I’ve heard that Bassetts are great typists. I don’t know why you would think such a thing.

:-)

susmart3

Then if the amount of abortions from rape is *so small,* why not just leave them out of the equation entirely, instead of “voting” on who deserves one?

PrincessJasmine4

What do you mean?
Pro aborts are usually the ones who bring up the tape and incest bit Not pro lifers
It’s really more of red herring

susmart3

I don’t care *who* brings it up. I’m not the one trying to change laws. It’s not a red herring to those women affected, no matter how small the number may/maynot be.

PrincessJasmine4

There are no pro life laws that would not allow for women who are victims of rape or incest to not terminate if their absolute mental well being was at risk

“There are no pro life laws that would not allow for women who are victims of rape or incest to not terminate if their absolute mental well being was at risk”

I would strongly disagree with that as individual states are happy to pass laws *even if* they know the will ultimately be declared unconstitutional.

“However, since when do we judge people based on who their father is?” Happens all the time. If you’re rich and white you will see less time in jail than poor and black.

“Is this person any less deserving of life because of who her father was???” No. It’s less deserving because it’s not legally a person. And we are NOT going to agree on that one…

Adam Peters

Some of my friends would have been legally considered three-fifths of a person at one point in time. Just because it was legal, that didn’t make it right.

PrincessJasmine4

I would strongly disagree with that as individual states are happy to pass laws *even if* they know the will ultimately be declared unconstitutional.

Citation please. I’d like to know which states have actually passed laws that would block abortion due to rape, incest or health of mother.

Happens all the time. If you’re rich and white you will see less time in jail than poor and black.

And you’re ok with this? This is what’s wrong with society.

You should not be judged by who your father is or your mother for that matter.

You should be judged for who you are.

No. It’s less deserving because it’s not legally a person.

So are dogs underserving of life because they are not a legally a person?

Come on … you can come with something better than that, can’t you?

Basset_Hound

But Doe vs. Bolton defines “health of the mother” so broadly you can drive the Space Shuttle through it. The law should allow for the LIFE of the mother, which is a lot more strictly defined.

PrincessJasmine4

Absolutely

Ingrid Heimark

Not even the life of the mother is good enough reason to kill a baby after viability, if the pregnancy must be terminated, it can be done without killing the baby. Everyone knows this, it was simply the US SC way of legalizing abortion till birth without sounding like nazi

Basset_Hound

Yes, I agree. If the pregnancy must be ended then deliver the child by c-section and care for it , even if the child is so premature the “care is nothing more than comfort care. I don’t believe the child should be ripped apart, injected with lethal drugs or have its brain sucked out. It should be treated as a patient as well.

susmart3

Legal may not “make it right,” but legal does make it legal. Roe v Wade was a *compromise.* But you- meaning some in your movement- want more. Much more- legislation like intrusive vaginal probes, etc. All of which *only* target the woman, never the man. Forcing people to abide by your moral code take more that talk. Are you willing to jail women who get abortions? Are you willing to pay for their incarceration? What are you willing to do when persuasion fails?

PrincessJasmine4

Actually, it’s the people of your ilk who keep wanting more.

You give the pro aborts an inch, they’ll try to take a mile.

You people want abortion on demand at any time during pregnancy for any reason (including sex selection) and you want it for free.

Much more- legislation like intrusive vaginal probes, etc

Stop pretending that vaginal ultrasounds were not routinely used at every PP across the country…

It’s standard procedure.

What you people don’t want is for the expectant mother to see the picture of the baby or here the tiny heartbeat

Why not inform the mother?

Why do you people want to keep the woman in the dark?

What are you pro aborts so scared of?

Losing their $400?

All of which *only* target the woman, never the man

Well it’s not like a man has a vagina or can carry a child to term, so your point is moot.

You wouldn’t make this same argument about imposing your morality on a rapist or pedophile, would you?

Are you willing to jail women who get abortions?

What you are forgetting is that it is all predicated on the assumption that we criminalise the mechanism of crime and the choice of victim, not the mens rea of the perpetrator.

It is foolish to suggest that a particular mechanism of murder results in a predetermined jail sentence. A person who uses a gun to kill the President will surely be executed for murder, while a person who uses a gun to defend himself and his family will often not even be prosecuted.

You absurdly assume that punishments ought to be classed by victim and murder weapon.

The usual mechanisms of justice apply: a prosecutor will bring charges under one of various homicide statutes; the jury will determine if the State has met its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and, more importantly, whether any mitigating circumstances are present. That determination is the basis for punishment, not the weapon used or the location.

However, even when abortion was illegal it was usually the abortionist/hitman that was prosecuted, not the expectant mother.

Are you willing to send someone to jail or fine them for destroying an Eagle egg? (after all, it’s just an egg and not the eagle, right?)

The US government is, even though they’ve been removed form the endangered species list.

According to you, if it’s not a person they don’t deserve any kind of rights so I’m sure you don’t agree with this law either.

What are you willing to do when persuasion fails?

Rapists are gonna rape, murderers are gonna murder, pedophiles are gonna keep having sex with kids.
Should we make all these acts legal just because persuasion or even prosecution fails to deter them?

Ingrid Heimark

Are you kidding me, Roe a compromise? No way, Roe is a tragedy. Killing jews was legal in Germany during the war, legal doesn’t make it right

And also, do you really consider an ultrasound more invasive than a suction machine inserted through the vagina, into the cervix, and then the uterus, tearing a baby apart and finally scrape the enitre uterine lining, sometimes puncturing the uterus and the mother bleeding to death?

DianaG2

What are you willing to do to bring back those 55 million people who have been killed inside their moms in the past forty years?

That’s over a million per year.

Basset_Hound

It’s been well documented that the high number of kids growing up in minority neighborhoods without fathers has contributed to the high rate of crime. How many suburban kids are playing “The Knockout Game”?

susmart3

Suspect they’d rather travel to black neighborhoods to buy drugs.

DianaG2

??? What does THAT mean?

Adam Peters

Not necessarily. They come out here to the backwoods if they’re looking for meth–and the typical skin tone in this area is pretty pale…

Part138

Or cases where their fathers ARE around,* but are abusive and or alcohol and/or drug addicts.
*not being legally married to the mother probably makes these men, as well as good men in minority neighborhoods who are around but not married to the mother harder to count statistically.

Ingrid Heimark

Noone desevres an abortion, we don’t wish that bad upon anyone

MarcusFenix

The resistance to abortion, for 50% or more of Americans, is the fact that it’s elective/outside of medical necessity. Polls going back years definitively show people support rape or life of the mother issues.

The attempt to slow down abortions overall applies, as one might rightly figure, to the elective and non-medical reasons, such as “I don’t want to do anything that slows down my career”, or “I just didn’t want a kid anyway”. That the minority of abortions come from rape/med necessity doesn’t remove them from the overall discussion.

Ingrid Heimark

In fact, more women give birth after being raped than after a simply unplanned pregnancy.

DianaG2

Really? I did not know that.

I think that’s very cool. Bless their hearts.

Pro-aborts probably hate it. That’s pretty much their whole case.

Ingrid Heimark

I think the statistics I saw is that 60% abort an unplanned baby, whilst 70% of rape victims give birth

No, I don’t speak for the entire pro-life movement. I do, however, speak for what I wrote, and neither of the claims that you mentioned were relevant to anything that I said in my article.

Ingrid Heimark

The entire movement doesn’t think that, but obvious.ly it is incomprehensible for you to understand that anyone understands the facts different than you do. It is simple, You know rape victims get pregnant. you assume we don’t, whilst we do know that, but don’t see yet another act of violenbce against yet another innocent being as the correct response to it. do you assume that we should, if we knew women got pregnant by rape, support the slicing and dicing of their unborn children?

Basset_Hound

I know women who had pregnancies where fetus was dead or could not live. I know women were victims of rape and got pregnant. I know of teenage incest victims. They had abortions. And apparently “pro-life” thinks these are non-existent or… frivolous.

Ummmm…..no…

If the baby has died of natural causes before birth, removing it is not an abortion.

If a fetus is severely disabled, we argue that the child still has dignity and worth. We also argue that many times the prognosis given by an OB/GYN, who has NO experience treating the disabled, many times is excessively pessimistic.

As for rape and incest. there is a BIG difference between “rare” and “non-existent” and definitely between “rare” and “frivolous”. WE recognize that a child is a child, no matter what the circumstances of his conception, and that the child should not pay with his life for the actions of his father. We believe in helping both the mother and the child, as both are crime victims. How does Planned Parenthood help a teenage incest victim? By vacuuming out the girl’s womb, taking her assailant’s money, and handing her right back to the perp for more abuse without even reporting the crime. Compassionate, huh?

If a pregnancy has gone so awry that both lives will be lost if no medical intervention takes place, then pretty much everyone in the pro-life movement will agree that the life that can be saved is the life that should be saved. However, these circumstances are extremely RARE. Even back in the 60′ Dr. Alan Guttmacher himself recognized this fact and stated as much. We also are astute enough to recognize the difference between allowing for exceptions and basing one’s argument on the exceptions.

Recently, our local news featured a story of a man who broke into a neighbor’s home to save a Down’s syndrome teenager from a fire. According to your “logic”, I can break into Adam’s house, help myself to his stash of beer and his brand new big screen TV. If he demands that I leave, I can cock one eyebrow and say, nonchalantly “How could you be so inhuman? I’ve known a man who helped a neighbor escape a house fire! I guess you would call that ‘frivolous’, wouldn’t you?”

susmart3

OK, I was following you until this point… Whut?

“Recently, our local news featured a story of a man who broke into a neighbor’s home to save a Down’s syndrome teenager from a fire. According to your “logic”, I can break into Adam’s house, help myself to his stash of beer and his brand new big screen TV. If he demands that I leave, I can cock one eyebrow and say, nonchalantly “How could you be so inhuman? I’ve known a man who helped a neighbor escape a house fire!”

Andrew J. Corrales

Substitute Adam for a pregnant woman, the robber for the pro-“choice” movement, breaking and entering and using alcohol and television for ripping a living human child apart, substitute Adam asking the hypothetical robber for the pro-life movement, and the robber’s argument for yours. Now you should at least understand Basset_Hound’s comment.

Adam Peters

Just to clarify for everyone, I don’t have beer or a large screen TV in my house. There are, however, guns and a large dog here.

Basset_Hound

You can shoot me dead if I break into your house. You can’t go about shooting people just because you want to.

Basset_Hound

And the fact that the law allows someone to enter another’s property to save him from a fire. One can not use the exception to justify breaking into another’s house simply because they feel like it.

Ingrid Heimark

True and that is where the life-exception comes in, you can break a law (against abortion) to save a mother, but not for convenience. Such, abortion laws don’t even need a life-clause, neccessity in the criminal system takes care of it.

DianaG2

I was having trouble following that, too.

But it’s BRILLIANT!! Thanks, Andrew and BH.

JDC

The term is pro-life, not “pro-life” Unnecessary quotation marks do not improve sentences.

susmart3

However calling it pro-abort does?

Andrew J. Corrales

Actually, you’re right. Calling them “pro-death” is way more accurate. These are frequently (not always, however, there are a few exceptions) the same people who want to release/defend/support dictators (except Hitler), murderers, terrorists, and the criminally insane, and then be wussy about airport security, fighting wars, and letting people defend themselves. Does this variety of liberal have a problem with the human race? “Pro-death eaters,” anyone?

Since many pro-choice people oppose adoption and mthinks some of us should be aborted, pro-abortion is a excellent choice of words. The true pro-choice people are us, who believes in the CHOICE betweenadoption and parenting, not just abortion

Abby

You just don’t believe in any choice for the woman with the unwanted pregnancy.

Adam Peters

A friend of mine gave her baby away when she realized that she wasn’t ready to raise a child–there was nothing wrong with that choice.

Abby

You are right there was nothing wrong with it. There is also nothing wrong with a woman deciding she doesn’t want to be pregnant.

Adam Peters

I suspect that the daughter she was pregnant with is happy that her gestation didn’t end early.

PrincessJasmine4

No, there’s nothing wrong with a women not wanting to be pregnant.
All she has to do is avoid getting pregnant

Killing her child if she does get pregnant… that’s what’s wrong.

Abby

It is not wrong for her to take control of her life by deciding she is not going to be pregnant. Now she should be smart and use as many forms of birth control as possible that way her chance of getting pregnant is non existent

Adam Peters

She should (and does now), but she also recognized that “taking control” of her life didn’t justify ending her daughter’s life.

PrincessJasmine4

I never said it was wrong for her to take control of her life by deciding she doesn’t want to be pregnant, I actually agree with you there.
Not everyone is meant to pass on their genes.
Some people really shouldn’t… you for example (and other pro aborts) are the type of person who should never be allowed to pass on their selfish gene even if you wanted to.

What I said is that it would be wrong for her to take the child’s life IF she became pregnant.

Abby

I don’t plan to pass on my genes. I’ve never understood why anyone would want that but I’m not going to tell someone they can’t do it just because I don’t think it is a choice for me.

Rebekah

But you’re taking it further, saying that we should be fine with a woman killing her child because she doesn’t want to pass on her genes. Guess what, when the zygote has formed, the woman has passed on her genes. Half of that DNA inside the zygote is hers, but the unique composition of genes is the baby’s. Once a zygote has formed a new life exists, and yes, I have a serious problem with a woman destroying that life just because she doesn’t want to be a mother.

Abby

You can have a problem with it. You just have to accept the fact that you have no say and it really is her decision if she goes through an unwanted pregnancy or not.

Rebekah

So if I see someone being raped I shouldn’t call the police because I have no say in what the rapist chooses to do with his body?

Abby

Rape is illegal and abortion is legal. There is a big difference between the two.

Rebekah

So being legal makes an act of violence okay?

PrincessJasmine4

Rebakah, you’re dealing with a whiny apathetic neurotic pro abort who wallows in her unfounded fears of pregnancy.
She’s kinda beyond reach…
Several of them are.

Basset_Hound

Not only that but if she were so happy with her choices, she would not come to a pro-life web site to preen and to seek attention. You’re right. It’s just not worth it.

Rebekah

It’s worth it if someone who is sitting on the fence sees this debate and realizes where logic and science lie.

PrincessJasmine4

Yes, that it is where you are 100% correct.

DianaG2

Yes, that’s why I keep thinking, also.

Especially a young person? A teenager, either boy or girl? She or he might be in a position to help a friend who has become pregnant unexpectedly.

You just never know.

I always think of that Twilight Zone (okay, this is for Geezers like myself!) where Donald Pleasance plays the schoolteacher who is retiring, and he feels utterly useless.

Anyway, you get the point?

He wonders if he ever made a difference in the world, or in the lives of any students.

Then, he has a dream or vision, or something, wherein the ghosts of his former students appear fully grown, and they explain their acts of heroism during the war (WWI or II, not sure?) and how they gave their lives, etc, for others, or how they taught others what he had taught them.

OMG, this is making me cry — here at the library again! :-) I think they are going to set aside a box of Kleenex with my name on it pretty soon?

That’s funny I can find just as many polls that say most people are pro choice.

Adam Peters

The fact remains that we’re continuing to push forward with our legislative agenda (thanks Texas Senate!), and we don’t plan on stopping any time soon.

PrincessJasmine4

please, by all means.. find us a 2013 poll that proves your point

Please

Basset_Hound

Back in 1853, there were polls that showed most people were pro-slavery.

PrincessJasmine4

Poor Abby, caught on the wrong side of history…and she doesn’t even know it.

DianaG2

Time will tell, right?

DianaG2

Actually, there is no different regarding morality.

Only legality.

ThePaganProLifer

Slavery was legal once

Kathryn A. O’Keefe

You don’t seem to understand this, so I’m going to lay it out without any similes or anything.
Pro-lifers are against abortion because it is the willful killing of another human being, also known as homicide. It is just as much a pregnant woman’s decision to have an abortion as it is any person’s decision to walk into a room and shoot someone. The fact that a person can choose to do so does not make it right, nor does it make it their right to do so.
So, whether we have a say in the issue or not (and as voters, people do have a say), we will continue to fight against it, just as anyone else with a half an ounce of decency would fight to protect others from being killed.

The problem is, abortion doesn’t make uyou un-pregnant, it makes you the mother of a dead child

DianaG2

She already IS a mother.

Rebekah

Very true. Maybe more accurate would be to say that she doesn’t want to continue to be a mother.

DianaG2

Yes, so true.

PrincessJasmine4

To be sure, you are doing humanity a favor.
No one and I mean
NO ONE wants little Abbys running around
That would be a travesty
As a matter of fact, if all pro aborts would sterilize themselves, this world would be a better place.
So I thank you in advance for your service to the planet.

But it’s not the point.

The point is, taking someone’s life, is not right. It never has been, it never will be.
You are on the wrong side of history.

Rebekah

And you count killing the child as birth control?

Abby

No I count abortion as what a woman can do after her birth control method failed .

Rebekah

So you would be okay if parents killed their child if their abortion failed and the baby was delivered alive?

Abby

That’s different. It is outside of the woman’s body and she can leave it at a hospital or several other places.

Rebekah

So being outside of a woman’s body is what makes this life worth protecting? That’s like saying that being in America is what makes me human. A person’s location has nothing at all to do with their worth.

Abby

A persons location has nothing to do with their worth but a fetus is not a person until it has reached the point of viability.

Rebekah

So you’re saying that humans who rely on ventilators to survive aren’t people?

Abby

They aren’t residing in the body of another person to keep them alive. They are different than a fetus.

Rebekah

How? Be specific.

DianaG2

It’s as if pro-aborts look at the new little guy or gal as a trespasser on the property of another.

The “property of another” in this case being allegedly the mom’s uterus.

But, the law of trespass requires that notice be given to any potential trespassers. Even if you leave your door unlocked, and someone walks into your living room (or your ballroom or banquet hall LOL), that may not qualify as trespassing strictly speaking? (Sometimes anyway? Not a lawyer here.)

But, when notice is required, that IMPLIES the miscreant trespasser is capable of reaching informed consent.

But, although the new little guy or gal is completely incapable of consent (which is required for trespass to occur), because of lack of sentience — in a very strange twist of reality and reason — the very lack of sentience is what pro-aborts use to justify punishing and killing the new little guy or gal.

Yet, somehow proceeding as if the new guy is a trespasser.

Am I making sense? Just a thought I came up with right now. There are so many things wrong with abortion, it’s difficult to separate the different twists and turns.

Basset_Hound

The argument can also go something like this…..

THEY are the one who brought the interloper into THEIR home by a choice THEY made. This so-called interloper didn’t have any say in the matter, whatsoever. In fact he/she is too helpless to do much of anything, until he/she has had a chance to grow and develop. How illogical (and cruel) is it for someone to decide her helpless captive is “inconvenient” and then kills him?

DianaG2

Yes, BH!!!

You’ve said it better than I.

Thanks, dear.

It’s like they’re having it BOTH ways at the same time.

ThePaganProLifer

A fetus has no choice but to be in the mothers body. A rapist or abuser does. A child just comes into existence. They can’t help it.

Basset_Hound

Some people consider a chimp a person. Your distinction is just as arbitrary (and meaningless).

DianaG2

Not only is a fetus a person. Even before the fetal stage — that little guy or gal is a person as well.

DianaG2

What is your definition of “person?”

Actually the Supreme Court of the U.S. never dealt with that issue. They only dealt with the issue of “when does the right to life start for American citizens?”

They answered that the right to life starts when one is born.

Kermit Gosnell decided even that wouldn’t be good enough. He killed babies AFTER they were born.

Sometimes I wonder how many other late-term abortionists do that? Maybe they just never got caught.

Yet.

Further, “the point of viability” is highly variable, and not at all scientific. It’s only dependent on electronic equipment. We should be referring to , “A point of viability,” not “THE point of viability.”

ThePaganProLifer

they are viable at 20-22 weeks. And by your logic, would a person alone in space be no longer human because there is no way to save them?

ThePaganProLifer

It’s a magical moment with unicorns and sparkles and faeries when a child “suddenly” becomes human

Basset_Hound

Then why bother with birth control at all?

Basset_Hound

People with dignity and character would count accepting the child and rearranging their lives, or placing him up for adoption.

Abby

For some people no amount of rearranging their life will ever make an unwanted child wanted

Rebekah

So whether or not someone is wanted makes them more of a person and more worth protecting?

Basset_Hound

Then hopefully, at some point in time the child will learn that mommy rejected him because SHE had problems.

Abby

Not wanting kids doesn’t mean a woman has problems. It just means she wants to do something besides pop out babies.

Basset_Hound

Well geez, there are many women who have managed to pop out one or two babies and STILL do other things with their lives. Imagine THAT!

Abby

Good for them. It’s probably what they wanted. Not every woman has dreams of having babies.

Basset_Hound

But once again, women with dignity and character learn to readjust their plans and dreams if an unexpected baby should arrive. It’s the difference between being an adult and being a two year old trapped in an adult’s body.

PrincessJasmine4

Once again.. this is Abby we’re taking about.. to someone with dignity and character.

Basset_Hound

It’s late, and I’m going to bed. My husband hurt himself on the ice last weekend, and I need to make him feel better.

DianaG2

Life is what happens while you’re making other plans.

Basset_Hound

This is from John Lennon’s last album “Double Fantasy”. The name of the cut was “Beautiful Boy”, and was written about his (then) 5 year old son. I REALLY cried over that one. Lennon was a cruel, bombastic jerk. Then he FINALLY finds peace, love and has a family, only to get gunned down.

DianaG2

I didn’t even know it was from a song. I just saw it on a poster or something.

Another of my favorites — which I DO know is from a song: “It’s a fool who plays it cool by making his world a little colder.”

Good pro-abort slogan, don’t you think?

(PS: From what I’ve read, there wasn’t much love or peace there. I don’t really know, of course. Just an impression. I’m not suggesting that makes it okay to kill him, of course.)

Basset_Hound

That’s “Hey Jude” from the Beatles.

DianaG2

I know. I didn’t know the other quote was also from a song, though:

“Life is what happens when you’re making other plans.” I never even heard of that album.

Thanks, BH.

Ingrid Heimark

And that’s why adoption is an excellent choice

DianaG2

Pregnancy can occur with or without dreams of babies.

Rebekah

Well, at this point in my life, I’m not at a place where I can take care of children, so I’ve chosen not to have children yet, though I do want them at some point. You know how I’ve prevented pregnancy? I haven’t had sex. You know what? It works 100% and prevents both pregnancy and STDs.

When I was little someone taught me that it was a biological need. When I got to be a teenager — well, you can imagine how that “teaching” would affect a teenager.

It’s just so much needless suffering.

DianaG2

“pop out?”

That’s not even respectful to the mom or the baby, or human history.

Do something besides? Yes, definitely, you can do plenty. Maybe your little son or daughter will grow up to do that along with you, or to help you with whatever.

This is another of the more subtle lies of Roe v. Wade.

Norma’s attorneys convinced the court that pregnant women were the victims of discrimination.

Okay, that part was true. Pregnant women were discriminated against, in the workplace, at school, colleges and universities, and other places.

But, why not work to end that discrimination? Why kill the little guy or gal waiting to be born into the world? She or he might help with that project, some day.

It’s like as if African-American people went to court to fight for the “right” to have their skin color chemically changed, (in order to avoid being discriminated against) instead of going to court asking for an end to racial discrimination and segregation.

Ingrid Heimark

That is why adoption is an excellent choice

DianaG2

“wanted” or “unwanted” —-

Those are just whims. Those don’t really mean anything. It’s like images flickering on a screen.

You say rearrangement of one’s life does not make a particular situation change from “unwanted” to “wanted.”

Yet, you want to rearrange the entire universe in order to align the universe with your whim.

The birth control part: Of course that’s fine.

In case of b.c. failure, though —- Not fine to kill the little guy or gal.

Basset_Hound

“wanted” or “unwanted”….

What if the mom was all fine and dandy with having a baby, but once the child arrives, does she get to kill him if he doesn’t live up to HER expectations?

MamaBear

What about all the other things that happen to us even less in our control than pregnancy? 99% of the time, the woman was a willing partner to the act which created that life. However, life is full of accidents, natural disasters, illnesses, people who mistreat us, all of which alter our plans, our lives, in ways we cannot control, often far more permanently than pregnancy does.

DianaG2

That is a good question.

I fear that the pro-abort answer is just simply, “No, it’s not okay once the baby is born, though. But, it’s okay any time up until that.”

Even a few minutes, I guess.

PrincessJasmine4

This is Abby we’re talking about…
not people with dignity and character

Basset_Hound

Unfortunately that’s what we get when we teach children that everything centers around their FEELINGS and that “self-esteem” is more important than character.

DianaG2

I don’t really have any theories about how things got to be the way they are.

I just want to try to do whatever possible to help little babies live.

Ingrid Heimark

Yes, she can have her baby ripped to pieces or poisoined, that doesn’t make it right. I can CHOOSE a lot of things, that doesn’t make it right

MarcusFenix

“Now she should be smart and use as many forms of birth control as
possible that way her chance of getting pregnant is non existent”

If only it worked that way. Clearly, that level of responsibility is falling to the wayside. You already know that no form of birth control is 100% effective. There is no such thing as non-existent in such a case.

As PJ said..she could have chosen to not become pregnant. Her actions lead her to that outcome. Nothing more and nothing less.

Your answer is to destroy. Ours is not. Pretty clear cut difference.

Ingrid Heimark

I just said I believe in choices, you obviously aren’t reading what I write

Rebekah

Adam was talking about the bro-choice mindset, not about women who were victims of rape or incest. Also, we do not consider such situations to be non-existent or frivolous. We simply believe that a child’s life has worth no matter who their father is. We believe that one act of violence does not justify another act of violence.

Andrew J. Corrales

Aborting an already-dead fetus is something the English-speaking citizens of Earth call “a miscarriage.” Sorry, but pro-life people live in this universe called “reality.” If you perceive that we think those unpleasant things are nonexistent or frivolous, then yes, we do live in a different universe than you do. Sh|nyagaHk shulu’h !tapef?

MarcusFenix

“The premise behind bro-choice is simple: being able to talk a woman into having an abortion…”

Which would put it in a totally different light and context than someone having an abortion for other reasons, such as the fetus had died in utero as you state. Why equate the two when they’re nothing alike?

Ingrid Heimark

Because she thinks it makes us look stupid, whilst all it does is show how little she herself understands

Anonymous

Health reasons account for less than 1% of abortions, and rape and incest combined account for only 6-7% of abortions. The other 92-93% are used as a form of birth control. So I think he’s living in the same universe. He just sees past all the emotional rhetoric used to paint the exception as the rule.

MamaBear

I know I’m dating myself here, but before Roe vs. Wade, almost every state, if not every state, had exceptions for rape, incest, and either life of the mother or health of the mother. After the thalidomide situation, many states allowed abortion if the mother had taken it before knowing she was pregnant.
The reason many people originally supported Roe vs. Wade, was they thought it would cut through problems those women faced, such as having to produce a police report if it was rape or incest (so if she didn’t report it…), or having to have a hospital medical board agree that her life or health was at stake, except of course emergencies.
One case that made the news was a kindergarten teacher in AZ who was embarrassed that her privacy was violated because the request for an abortion after taking thalidomide had to go before a hospital board, which they ironically approved. So because her “privacy” was violated, she goes to the national media?
So, what happens when a doctor consults with other doctors? Is his patient’s privacy violated? I cannot say how it was then, but I know how it works now:
My rare form of breast cancer was discussed in detail, except for my name, at meetings of doctors at my cancer center. The only doctor other than my original ones to find out who I was, was the one who requested to join my team as my radiation oncologist. None of the other doctors in the cancer center would actually know who I was walking down the hall of the cancer center. I was just one of many middle-aged female cancer patients. I was a lot more bothered that a top radiation oncologist thought my cancer sounded “interesting.” You don’t ever want to be “interesting” to an oncologist! (He is very good in his field, but will never be a diplomat.)
But, to return to what I was originally saying. Many people did not even imagine that abortion would become a big business, that it would be used for birth control. We did not yet have ultrasounds to see into the womb. I really wonder, if those laws had stayed in place, and if Roe vs. Wade were coming up for the first time with current medical technology and privacy laws, if the decision might not have been different? If the Supreme Court justices had been able to see into the future, would they have still made the same decision?

PrincessJasmine4

of course if they could have looked into the future or even the present (at the time) they would have known Norma was lying and perjuring herself.
Roe was based on a blatant lie,

MamaBear

Very true, but it was also based on ignorance of fetal development and the naïve belief that it would still remain a last resort of the desperate and extreme circumstances, rather than a substitute for birth control and a major business. Pro-abortion supporters were actively looking for a case. If it had not been Norma, it would have been someone else.

PrincessJasmine4

*nods*
very very true…

Here’s some good news for today

Abortion as a human right was up for debate again by the EP, and guess what?

But, it’s starting to worry me a little. Why do they keep bringing this up?

Will there ever be a time when the matter will be finalized and they can’t keep voting on it? It seems clear that these votes are happening because the pro-aborts want to help make the “right” to abortion paramount.

I feel really scared about this alleged “misuse” of conscience protection rights. It seems that somebody is monitoring this and making it into a pretext for “protecting women.”

The whole thing just gives me a creepy feeling. Even though I’m happy with that pro-life vote.

Any thoughts on this?

Adam Peters

The entire story of the EU consists of holding vote after vote until the “correct” outcome has been reached. That was attitude taken by Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker of Luxemburg eight years ago when they were voting on an EU constitution.

“If at the end of the ratification process, we do not manage to solve the problems, the countries that would have said ‘No,’ would have to ask themselves the question again.”

It’s hard to say–the history has been that when ever the EU has made a decision, it becomes just about impossible to repeal it. On the other, hand, the organization is under a lot of strain as the solvent member countries are tired of being made to bail out the perpetually bankrupt ones, so they may soon have bigger concerns than enshrining abortion rights…

PrincessJasmine4

I’m just glad they lost and we won.

DianaG2

Oh, yes, of course!

I don’t mean to suggest otherwise — by any means!

I just hope it is a LASTING win??

Basset_Hound

Even when she was firmly in the pro-abort camp, it didn’t take Norma McCorvey very long to figure out that Sarah Weddington (her attorney) was just using her. Norma was just a country gal and Sarah treated her as an embarassment.

DianaG2

Jackass!!

Attorneys are so good at that.

Adam Peters

Yeah, even she was pro-choice, they didn’t ever invite her to their anniversary celebration. She was always just a means to an end for them, which is the same way that Tucker, Christian, and Nils see their women, too.

DianaG2

A bunch of creeps!

DianaG2

Rude oncologist!

So sorry, MamaBear :-(

No, of course nobody imagined it back then.

Also, marital rape was not a crime, or at least had newly become criminalized.

MamaBear

Diana,
He was tops in his field and genuinely concerned about patients, and that is what counts. I think if there was a side effect possible, I had it, so I started accusing him of being a sadist. He would answer me “we have to make you feel worse before you can get better.”
I was actually blessed to have an amazing oncology team. Sometimes I wonder how doctors who know they will eventually lose so many patients can continue to be so caring. (30% of all breast cancer patients metastasize and eventually die of it.)
Life is a precious gift from very beginning to end. It is fragile, something to be cherished and protected. We don’t have the right to take it away from others or throw it away ourselves. I think that is something too many people in our society have lost sight of.

DianaG2

Yes, no kidding, Mama. We certainly have.

I remember one of our lay teachers at St. John the Baptist High in Pittsburgh, talking about abortion. I didn’t even really know what the heck it was at the time, except one of my friends had told me, “Did you know some ladies can stop being pregnant without having a baby.”

I thought, “Wow, those must be very smart ladies?”

I assumed it was something that happened by itself or something? I think the word “abortion” — which I’d never actually heard before (I was fifteen) — must have come up somewhere in that conversation with my friend, because I remember thinking it was some weird, ugly word. It must be the name of some strange, monstrous oddity.

Because I’d been around lots of pregnant ladies. My mom had four sisters. I have thirty cousins. Never heard of any pregnancies just going away unless there was a baby involved. (A LIVE baby!)

Of course, I had heard of a miscarriage here and there, but that was always sad and horrible, according to what I overheard.

One day our (lay) sewing teacher said, “Girls, you may have heard someone talking about abortion.”

(“Ooops, there’s that weird word again,” I thought. I started paying attention, because the entire matter was very bizarre and curious to me. I wanted to learn more.)

The only thing I understood was, “That is a live baby, created by G-d.” And then something about, if you do that weird word, you are killing that baby. Therefore, it’s murder.

Okay, well, now I knew that this word was something somebody did on purpose. It didn’t just happen by itself.

So, that was 1963. I was fifteen years old at the time. Okay, I wasn’t the swiftest kid around, I guess. This process took a few years, for it all to sink in.

By the way, the best of all the article was this, because it is so true…

As anyone who has been involved with the pro-life movement knows, we tend to attract hateful comments. Some are old standbys, such as “Your mom should have aborted you.” These words are invariably sneered out with a look of smug satisfaction, as if the speaker is somehow convinced that he or she is the first one clever enough to think of them. There is something almost adorable about this level of naïve cluelessness. It’s like listening to a small child who seems to think that learning to use the toilet without assistance has transformed him into a veritable god among men.

Adam Peters

Yeah, I wanted to put that part in there because it just jumps out to me when ever I hear someone use that line :)

Ingrid Heimark

Yes, and it shows beyond any words we ourselves could imagine that they are not pro-choice, they are pro-abortion, any choice other than abortion are to be lamented or not appreciated

PrincessJasmine4

Then there are those who are just plain anti birth.
They represent a scarily broad faction of the pro aborts.

Ingrid Heimark

Yes, they are probably the main group, and pushes those who (tragically misunderstood) care about women’s rights in front of them, nota coincidence these people usually are extreme environmentalists and animal rights people that hates humans and especially human exceptionalism. We animal activists that are pro-life are usually animal welfare….

PrincessJasmine4

So true.
Take for example Peter Singer.
He believes it’s ok to kill kids up to the age of reason.
But is an animal rights activist

I’m following you btw :-)

DianaG2

He’s pathetic and twisted.

I can’t even read his essays anymore.

DianaG2

Oh, yes, absolutely. You know, I’ve always suspected pro-aborts were just people who hated kids.

I’ve never seen much evidence to the contrary.

PrincessJasmine4

Nor have I

Basset_Hound

Here’s one thing that’s really ironic. Suppose they said that Asians or blacks ruin their lives merely by existing (as they do about children) they’d be called “bigots” wouldn’t they?

PrincessJasmine4

Yup pro aborts are fetusist

Basset_Hound

I’m glad you’re WRITING it. I think it would twist my tongue too much to say it….too many sesesss

PrincessJasmine4

Lol!
Pro aborts engage in Fetusism :-)

Basset_Hound

How about “fetuphobes”?

DianaG2

:-) Maybe because it doesn’t exist?

DianaG2

After forty years . . .

It wasn’t really that intelligent in the first place.

DianaG2

Yes, I thought that was excellent.

DianaG2

Another great article, Adam!

Thanks.

Adam Peters

Another great reader :)

DianaG2

LOL :-)

Thanks.

Adam Peters

I want to give a shoutout to the Princess, Rebekah, Basset Hound, Mama Bear, Diana, Andrew, Ingrid, Marcus, JDC, Kathryn, Part138, and anyone who I missed. Thanks for keeping the page on lock.

MarcusFenix

Hey, it’s what we do. :)

Adam Peters

And you do it well

MarcusFenix

Eh, i’m not perfect…but i do ok. ;) I did kind of hijack that other thread with Aletha, so that was my bad LOL.

Adam Peters

Yeah…I was ready to step back from that one :)

MarcusFenix

Well…i’ve been called “confrontational” Also, a “glutton for punishment.”.

I prefer to think of myself as more dedicated, and relentless in pursuit of truth….or something. Or, giving up until there’s just nothing left seems wrong. Besides, people hate a quitter! ;)

DianaG2

It’s about the babies.

Even when you’re an old guy, people might be coming up to you, saying, “Hey, you’re that guy who talked my mom out of aborting me.”

There is such a guy in Philadelphia, to whom I owe my life. He’s (was?) an African-American gentleman (not that it makes a difference — except it’s even more impressive that back in the days of segregation, in the ’40’s, he cared enough about a little white baby . . . )

It’s very touching, really. I wish I knew who he was.

MarcusFenix

Have you attempted to find him? It’s not too hard to try and find people if you have at least some idea of where to start looking and some basic details. :)

DianaG2

Wow, that is quite an idea!

No, I never have tried to find him. I really have nothing except he was in Philly (probably a certain area) and knew my dad.

That would be soooo cool!!! If he was the age of my dad, he’d be almost 90 by now. He could have been a little older, though?

I always think of him when I read about the pro-life African-American Catholics in Philly. I think Alveda King is a parishioner.

Not that he was necessarily Catholic, although he may have been, of course. I just don’t have any info.

Unfortunately, my dad died over 20 years ago, so I have no way to get new facts :-(

MarcusFenix

It’s possible the man is still alive, but it would be a bit harder to track him down without at least a name, or an address of some sort.

If he was an actual member of a church, it’s likely they would have a copy of the roster/members list in their archives. You still would be hard pressed, without a name or any identifying information. *IF* he was a member of the church, the roster would narrow down the number of people considerably, but it would still require a great deal of leg work to try and track him down. That also assumes there is an accurate roster, that he was a member or at least attended and there was a record of it, and so on. If those were not to be the case, then without any additional identifying information, it would be considerably tougher (if not next to impossible), to find him.

The only other angle I can consider (given what’s been said here so far) is that your father may have his name written down somewhere. Old address book, old letters, or something along those lines. Without knowing more, that’s really all I can suggest.

DianaG2

Yes, those are many of the same problems we encounter when doing genealogical research — except we tend to know more names and so forth.

Unfortunately, I do not have access to anything that belonged to my dad. His “other” family has everything. He wrote a will specifically excluding me.

One of my uncles is still alive,though. You’re giving me some ideas here :-)

Not a huge chance, but . . .

MarcusFenix

Well, perhaps a phone call/letter to your uncle is in order. The chance might be slim, but if it’s important to you, it’s worth looking into.

DianaG2

Yes, thanks, Marcus.

Basset_Hound

Tell me about it. I’ve gotten several finger wagging lectures in a row from someone who’s a self-appointed debate coach/schoolmarm.

MarcusFenix

Eh…I was in forensics/debate. Was fun, but the coach couldn’t keep up. ;)

Basset_Hound

I preferred writing. I never was good at thinking on my feet.

MarcusFenix

I had to switch from writing to typing, because of my hands. I’ve got a bunch of notebooks around though, with various creative works in them. It is a nice thing that text on Word is faster than anything I could write, and it saves my hands since I’m not writing it out the long way, which is a bonus. I’ve been writing for a while, back and forth on a few things. My SO and I are packing stuff for a move, so i’ve been more derelict in writing, but…I’ve written a little in the last few weeks.

Anything specific you write, or just whatever comes to mind?

Basset_Hound

Social commentary, pretty much. Sometimes, I can spin wicked satire. As for Word..Spell Check is an absolute godsend.

MarcusFenix

Sounds good. I might want to read that sometime. :)

Word taunts me. My grammar and spelling usually aren’t too horrible, though I’m sure I use more commas or other punctuation more than I should. It taunts me, however, when I make stupid mistakes, such as spelling separate as “seperate” or other such errors, knowing that had I just slowed down for half a second, I wouldn’t be staring at that squiggly red line.

Basset_Hound

I can’t remember the thread, but a few weeks back on this site, I pretended to be a pro-abort troll, and actually drew “friendly fire” from a lurker.

MarcusFenix

Haha…yeah, you have to be careful about that. Don’t we have enough people pretending to be someone else *coughAlethacough* going around already? ;)

I do remember! DId you also do one about Hogwarts and Harry Potter? I’ve seen that done a few times, in a few places. Wondering now if all of those were you LOL

DianaG2

roflmao

Basset_Hound

I did a Harry Potter one here, yes. I floated it out on townhall a couple of years ago. Also on. NRO but I think the moderator took it down within minutes.

MarcusFenix

I’ve seen a few of those, on Twitchy and a couple of other places. Glad to know they might have been you. They were quite entertaining. :)

Basset_Hound

Twitchy wasn’t me. The one that turned up here was.

MarcusFenix

Fair enough :) The one from over there was quite a while ago, but incredibly entertaining.

DianaG2

Wow, I’ve never seen that. Where can I read it? Sounds great. LOL

DianaG2

LOL, yes.

DianaG2

Or curse — depending on how you look at it :-)

DianaG2

Same here.

MarcusFenix

There is a decent part which requires one to be able to think on their feet, to counter or accurately refute on the fly, or to come up with something witty. But it’s not really the essence of debate.

Consider a moment the most common topic on these boards with LAN: abortion.

You already know the ins and outs of the argument. The base ideas of which you stake your discussions and rebuttals are already known to you fairly well. With only some instances of people trying to get you in a “GOTCHA!” moment, you have things which work in your favor.

1. You already know the argument you’re going to make about 90% of the time.

Without going into a massive discussion about it…if you’ve never read Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War”, do yourself a favor and grab a copy. Just as a battlefield, logical debates can flow the same way. :) I promise, it’s worth the read.

Besides, in places like this..you can take time, read more, and come back with an answer later when you’re comfortable.

My personal way of things lies in the idea of anticipating the rebuttal. It’s not 100% all of the time, but 99 out of 100, it is incredibly close if not spot on. When I make a point, I must consider the rebuttal first, before I hit “post”. Is my argument weak? Are there facts to support their position, or to undermine my own? What are they going to come back with?

Most of the time, you can pretty easily guess. Especially in discussion of items such as abortion, pro-abortion supporters have a pretty well known laundry list of items they use to justify their cause. By knowing which point of the argument they’re going to make, based on what you’re saying and so forth…you’re already 3 steps ahead in the conversation. It allows you to make a better point of attack, and directly argue your points with a specific purpose in mind. You already know where you’re going, how you’re going to get there, and how your opponents are going to try and get out of it. It’s simply a matter of pressure, timing, and striking properly. :)

Basset_Hound

Seriously, Marcus, the passion and joy you feel for this sport (for lack of a better word) is palpable.

MarcusFenix

One should take pride and joy in what they do. ;)

DianaG2

lol

No, not really.

MarcusFenix

I kind of feel I did…which ended up especially awkward from my point of view, because the article was about being nice in your debate. Even I have to admit there were a few times where I totally threw Aletha under the bus, in less than polite terms.

I could have been worse…but even I have a limit when dealing with someone that I feel isn’t up to the task in the argument. No sense picking on the helpless…at least so much.

DianaG2

Ok, I guess I must have missed a lot there. I did miss a lot, because she wrote so much — without much white space — I had to skim or skip much.

It’s very kind of you. She is obviously troubled.

Yet, willing to kill in any event.

MarcusFenix

Well, you didn’t miss much, so don’t fret. Mostly, it was the same things, repeated in a different way, or items nitpicked while trying to get out of the main points that were made. It wasn’t my finest debate ever, but…even someone half awake would see what was going on.

When it comes to kindness, I’m…persnickety…about it. If someone is civil, or willing to be, then i’m fine with it. If they’re not…there’s a pretty solid part of me that would go to great lengths to completely bury them in their own feces. It does take a little effort sometimes to not completely drive someone into the ground…not because they haven’t earned it, but because at some point, there should be mercy. As I mentioned to BH about the Art of War…Sun Tzu said that when surrounding an enemy, always give them one way out. I try to do that…but i admit, my more argumentative nature gets the better of me and I just go for the proverbial throat. It’s a bad habit, but one I’ve somewhat tempered as I’ve grown older. ;)

DianaG2

Some people have psychiatric problems, whereby they don’t really understand what they are saying.

Ingrid Heimark

Or they understand, and defends it anyway, then the qualify for a diagnosis in which it is the people surrounding them that suffers

The statement that went something like “I don’t know why I believe this. Maybe it’s because I’m surrounded by people that are into ‘women’s rights'”. To me, that suggests she’s somewhat more ambivalent. Maybe you and Marcus have started to crack through her defenses.

PrincessJasmine4

Ah
I thought she was just being facetious

JDC

Who knows, people can be strange sometimes.

Basset_Hound

Also once in a rare while she will say she respects our position, particularly to Marcus. That’s why I’ve been content to hang back and let him deal with her. She seems somewhat willing to listen.

PrincessJasmine4

I’m still skeptical
But you may have a point

Someone45 is exhausting

Basset_Hound

I’m not convinced it’s her.

PrincessJasmine4

Dunno.. she and Abby sound incredibly similar… but..
you could be right… I guess we’ll never really know, will we?

JDC

Again, people can be crazy sometimes. Still, I hope they are the same person because otherwise there are two people like that out there, which is a horrifying thought.

PrincessJasmine4

true dat.
It would be a lamentable thing indeed to know that there are more misinformed, whiny, scared, cowardly and selfish people out there.

*shudder*

Basset_Hound

that is a depressing thought that there may be a whole generation that has no respect for human life. If the unborn are expendable, so are the old, the handicapped and the otherwise imperfect.

Basset_Hound

This one doesnt have the animosity towards children as Abby and someone do. In fact she works with the children’s liturgy at her church. Also she doesn’t whine about how pregnancy turns a woman into a dysfunctional pile of goo.

DianaG2

Thanks, Adam. And, yes, I also thank the rest of you guys.

:-)

YOU’RE SO AWESOME!!!!

Ingrid Heimark

I read most of your articles, and I love them!

DianaG2

The only thing that stops me is having an appointment or class to go to.

Adam Peters

Thanks :) I’ll probably have to take a break from writing them for the next few months, but I’ll be back after that

MarcusFenix

I’m going to blame global warming for your possible break..along with the snowfall in Egypt right now.

Adam Peters

Yes, my absence will be due to both those factors, as well as a combination of the 1%, Congressional obstructionism, the patriarchy, the rich not paying their “fair share,” and all other calamities that my fellow commentators have taught me that I’m responsible for.

Ingrid Heimark

We will miss you :)

Adam Peters

I’ll miss seeing you guys keep the haters in line :)

MamaBear

Don’t take too long a break. Be back soon.

Andrew J. Corrales

What, precisely, does “keeping the page on lock” mean?

Adam Peters

Keeping an eye on the page and challenging whatever nonsense they throw at us.